IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v113y2017i1d10.1007_s11192-017-2465-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The law of limited excellence: publication productivity of Israel Prize laureates in the life and exact sciences

Author

Listed:
  • Gad Yair

    (Hebrew University of Jerusalem)

  • Nofar Gueta

    (Hebrew University of Jerusalem)

  • Nitza Davidovitch

    (Ariel University)

Abstract

The present paper extends Lotka’s theorem—which we rename as “the law of limited excellence”—while empirically modelling the scientific productivity of 46 Israel Prize laureates in the life and exact sciences—a group best described as ‘Star Scientists’. By focusing on this highly selective group we expose unequal scientific productivity even amongst Israel’s most prolific scientists. Specifically, we test the invariance of Lotka’s law by focusing attention on the extreme tail of publication distributions while empirically exploring the non-linearity of its seemingly “flat” tail. By exposing the rarity of excellence even in this extreme end of publication productivity we extend the generality of Lotka’s theorem and expose that—like a fractal—the tail of excellence behaves as the entire distribution. We end this empirical contribution by suggesting a few implications for research and policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Gad Yair & Nofar Gueta & Nitza Davidovitch, 2017. "The law of limited excellence: publication productivity of Israel Prize laureates in the life and exact sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 299-311, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:113:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2465-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2465-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2465-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-017-2465-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garfield, Eugene, 2009. "From the science of science to Scientometrics visualizing the history of science with HistCite software," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 173-179.
    2. Peter James Bentley, 2015. "Cross-country differences in publishing productivity of academics in research universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 865-883, January.
    3. L Egghe, 2005. "Relations between the continuous and the discrete Lotka power function," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 56(7), pages 664-668, May.
    4. Per O. Seglen, 1992. "The skewness of science," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 43(9), pages 628-638, October.
    5. Juntao Zheng & Niancai Liu, 2015. "Mapping of important international academic awards," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 763-791, September.
    6. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Alessandro Caprasecca, 2009. "The contribution of star scientists to overall sex differences in research productivity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 137-156, October.
    7. Lorenzo Ductor, 2015. "Does Co-authorship Lead to Higher Academic Productivity?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 77(3), pages 385-407, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marek Kwiek, 2018. "High research productivity in vertically undifferentiated higher education systems: Who are the top performers?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 415-462, April.
    2. Eyal Eckhaus & Nitza Davidovitch, 2021. "Academic Rank and Position Effect on Academic Research Output – A Case Study of Ariel University," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 10(1), pages 295-295, February.
    3. Fan Jiang & Niancai Liu, 2018. "The hierarchical status of international academic awards in social sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2091-2115, December.
    4. Maor Weinberger & Maayan Zhitomirsky-Geffet, 2021. "Diversity of success: measuring the scholarly performance diversity of tenured professors in the Israeli academia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 2931-2970, April.
    5. Gad Yair & Keith Goldstein & Nir Rotem & Anthony J. Olejniczak, 2022. "The three cultures in American science: publication productivity in physics, history and economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 2967-2980, June.
    6. Basma Albanna & Julia Handl & Richard Heeks, 2021. "Publication outperformance among global South researchers: An analysis of individual-level and publication-level predictors of positive deviance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8375-8431, October.
    7. Yu-Wei Chang & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2020. "Discovering types of research performance of scientists with significant contributions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1529-1552, August.
    8. Gad Yair & Keith Goldstein, 2020. "The Annus Mirabilis paper: years of peak productivity in scientific careers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 887-902, August.
    9. Creso Sá & Summer Cowley & Magdalena Martinez & Nadiia Kachynska & Emma Sabzalieva, 2020. "Gender gaps in research productivity and recognition among elite scientists in the U.S., Canada, and South Africa," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-14, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marek Kwiek, 2018. "High research productivity in vertically undifferentiated higher education systems: Who are the top performers?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 415-462, April.
    2. Fan Jiang & Niancai Liu, 2018. "The hierarchical status of international academic awards in social sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2091-2115, December.
    3. Maor Weinberger & Maayan Zhitomirsky-Geffet, 2021. "Diversity of success: measuring the scholarly performance diversity of tenured professors in the Israeli academia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 2931-2970, April.
    4. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2019. "A gender analysis of top scientists’ collaboration behavior: evidence from Italy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 405-418, August.
    5. Gad Yair & Keith Goldstein, 2020. "The Annus Mirabilis paper: years of peak productivity in scientific careers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 887-902, August.
    6. Jingqi Gao & Xiang Wu & Xiaowei Luo & Shukai Guan, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Safety Sign Research: 1990–2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15, January.
    7. Pentti Riikonen & Mauno Vihinen, 2008. "National research contributions: A case study on Finnish biomedical research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(2), pages 207-222, November.
    8. Lorenzo Ductor & Sanjeev Goyal & Anja Prummer, 2018. "Gender & Collaboration," Working Papers 856, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    9. Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Jürgen Lerner, 2021. "The coauthorship networks of the most productive European researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 201-224, January.
    10. Per O. Seglen & Dag W. Aksnes, 2000. "Scientific Productivity and Group Size: A Bibliometric Analysis of Norwegian Microbiological Research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(1), pages 125-143, August.
    11. Gad Yair & Keith Goldstein & Nir Rotem & Anthony J. Olejniczak, 2022. "The three cultures in American science: publication productivity in physics, history and economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 2967-2980, June.
    12. Gao, Qiang & Liang, Zhentao & Wang, Ping & Hou, Jingrui & Chen, Xiuxiu & Liu, Manman, 2021. "Potential index: Revealing the future impact of research topics based on current knowledge networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    13. Juan A Crespo & Ignacio Ortuño-Ortín & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2012. "The Citation Merit of Scientific Publications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-9, November.
    14. Abbas Hejri, 2022. "On the recent developments of mutual funds with fixed‐income holdings: a systematic review," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2313-2338, June.
    15. Bornmann, Lutz & Mutz, Rüdiger & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2010. "The h index research output measurement: Two approaches to enhance its accuracy," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 407-414.
    16. Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2013. "The role of statistics in establishing the similarity of citation distributions in a static and a dynamic context," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 173-181, July.
    17. Önder, Ali Sina & Schweitzer, Sascha & Yilmazkuday, Hakan, 2021. "Specialization, field distance, and quality in economists’ collaborations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    18. Zhichao Wang & Valentin Zelenyuk, 2021. "Performance Analysis of Hospitals in Australia and its Peers: A Systematic Review," CEPA Working Papers Series WP012021, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    19. Linnenluecke, Martina K. & Chen, Xiaoyan & Ling, Xin & Smith, Tom & Zhu, Yushu, 2017. "Research in finance: A review of influential publications and a research agenda," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 188-199.
    20. Fasolo, Barbara & Heard, Claire & Scopelliti, Irene, 2024. "Mitigating cognitive bias to improve organizational decisions: an integrative review, framework, and research agenda," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125404, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:113:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2465-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.